Before we get to anything else, there’s one thing I’d like to get out of the way.

*ahem*

CALLED IT!

Ok fine, the gloating is over.

In case you don’t know to what I am referring, in last week’s picks column I correctly predicted that Wisconsin would beat Ohio State. (I know, a broken clock still finds a nut twice a day, yeah yeah, whatever.)

I did not come to this conclusion after careful analysis of depth charts and statistics. Rather, I just looked at the spread. Here’s what I wrote last week:

[The line] started at -6.5… then it got… tighter? … Gut reaction: Vegas usually knows way more than I do about these things. … [If] there's a lot of people out there who think this game is going to be a lot closer than I would have thought, then I'll just go a few points the other way and call the upset.

Ex post facto, it’s easy to see why the betting line moved to a point that came dangerously close to calling the game a “pick ‘em”: Wisconsin is a disciplined group that plays good special teams and defense, they’re great in the trenches, and they have a stud running back. They were the toughest defense Ohio State would play to-date this season, and the game was at night in Madison, where the Badgers are notoriously tough to beat.

Why then, before I saw the line, was I blindly assuming that Ohio State would dominate? There is one element in this equation that Vegas does not care about one iota, but it’s something to which fans attach way too much significance.

Rankings.

Which gives us our lesson of the week: When picking games versus the spread, rankings do not matter. They don’t matter to Vegas, and they shouldn’t matter to you.

Going into last week, Ohio State and Michigan State were both 6-0. Each only had one win against a better-than-average opponent. Based on the season-to-date eyeball test, they would appear relatively comparable, but going into last week Ohio State was ranked No. 1 and Michigan State was ranked No. 13. Why? Because one team started the season at No. 2 and one team started the season unranked. In fact, Michigan State did not get a single point in the AP’s pre-season poll. (And, as I just found out, Central Michigan got two!)

Rankings are based on attrition and opinion. Point spreads are based on money, which means they’re based on reality.

People with money at risk make informed decisions and suffer the consequences if their predictions are wrong. People who fill out polls suffer no consequences if their “picks” are incorrect.

Just like in the stock market, prices move to keep buyers and sellers in equilibrium. If an asset is overpriced, the market will sell it until prices drop to a level where the asset is properly priced. If too many people make uninformed decisions, this will create an opportunity that those who do make informed decisions can exploit until the price is “corrected”.

In gambling, the “price” is the point spread – casinos adjust it to ensure that there is equal action on both sides of the bet. Some research has shown prediction markets to be better than average indicators as to the outcome of uncertain events, which is the similar to the behavior of point spreads.

This is not to say that Vegas gets is “right”, but this does say that they find the most appropriate price for the risk associated with an uncertain outcome (i.e. how many points to “spot” the underdog to make picking them an even-money bet).

But fans don’t think this way. We see a No. 1 team playing a No. 18 team and our guts tell us that the more highly-ranked team is the superior team, and by a wide margin at that. Sometimes this is right – in the preseason polls, the first and eighteenth-ranked teams were Alabama and North Carolina, respectively. I think the Tide probably would crush in that particular matchup.

But sometimes this way of thinking is wrong, as was the case with last week’s more balanced contest between then-ranked No. 1 Ohio State and No. 18 Wisconsin. Rankings are a man-made phenomenon that in no way represent anything about the matchup of any two teams on the actual playing field.

Plus, there is one team at each rank, and each rank is separated by an equal degree of magnitude that we subconsciously interpret to separate teams’ talents by that same degree of magnitude, which is not the case at all. If we really wanted to order teams by quality, we would need a system with more granular separation.

For example, if Oregon is ranked 1, then Oklahoma could be 1.27, Auburn 1.89, Boise State 2.03, and so on. (Actually, I’m sure there is some stat major out there who has already put something like this together.)

Bottom line: matchups matter, rankings don’t. Keep this in mind.

On another gambling note, how can Phil Steele only have 4,321 followers on Twitter? The man is an absolute college football guru. Had I know that to be his total before I signed up for Twitter a few weeks ago, I would have figured my ceiling to be around fourteen. Granted, all he really does is post links to his articles but still, respect people, respect.

Now, on to this week’s picks, where after last week’s performance I am more than certain to regress to the mean. It felt good to get that gloating in while I could.

Last week I went 4-1 picking winners and versus the spread, bringing my season total to 12-3 (winners) and 9-6 (versus spread).

*****

Purdue (+23.5) at Ohio State

Alright, I’ve written off Purdue two weeks in a row now, and lost both times. Is it time to start taking this team a little more seriously? Answer: Probably not, at least not this week.

The line opened at +27, but a lot of folks must have found that to be a little high, as did I, for no specific reason beyond that being just a huge spread between two in-conference opponents.

I can completely see Ohio State bouncing back after last week and absolutely demolishing the Boilermakers at home. But still, 23.5 points – man, that’s a lot of points.

This one is tough, but I just remembered that Purdue beat Ohio State last year, so I’m going with the Buckeyes to cover. Tressel is due to be straight up evil, and a revenge game may be the perfect time to do it. Plus, I just cannot picture Purdue scoring many points in Columbus (the Buckeyes’ D being slightly better than the Gophers’, on which the Boilermakers hung 28 last week), so I’m dismissing Purdue for the third week in a row. It has to work one of these times, right? Right?

Ohio State 41, Purdue 13

(And it will be one of those games where afterward, somebody will make the great “and it wasn’t even that close” joke.)

*****

Indiana (+14) at Illinois

The money says that some people (other than Penn State fans) think that Illinois has a pretty good defense, as the initial line of +7.5 has nearly doubled, making the Hoosiers two touchdown underdogs.

As we know, Illinois has a solid ground game – they don’t need to throw the ball well to score points. Though the Fighting Illini didn’t find the end zone against Michigan State next week, scoring against Indiana shouldn’t be a problem. But Indiana can score points too, as one-dimensional as their offense is. Illinois hasn’t played a team that whips the ball around as much as Indiana, which is averaging almost 320 yards per game through the air.

I’m feeling like the line got inflated a little too much, perhaps due to some money being scared about Indy’s near miss against their Sun Belt opponent last weekend.

I’ll take the points. The Illini will win, but the Hoosiers will beat the spread.

Illinois 31, Indiana 20

*****

Wisconsin (+5.5) at Iowa

This should be a great game, which unfortunately means this is by far the scariest line of the week. But, Iowa has the best defense in the Big Ten. Hawkeyes will cover at home. Barely.

Iowa 23, Wisconsin 17

*****

Michigan State (-5) at Northwestern

This is intriguing. The line for this game has behaved nearly identically to the Wisconsin – Ohio State spread last week. It opened lower than I expected, at -8, then it went down further, to -5, confusing me even more.

Look, I’m 3-0 versus the spread when picking the Spartans this year, and I don’t see any reason to hop off that train now. Yes they are undefeated and while not exactly riding “high”, I think they are riding nice and consistently.

Northwestern is coming off a bye week after a tough loss to Purdue, and while I love P-Fitz, I think he’s got a little bit of that Les Miles craziness in him, which has caused his team’s performance to be a bit "choppy". Uncertainty being scary, I’m not going to follow the smart money this week.

The Wildcats can have the points, and then some. The Spartans will take care of business, setting up what could be the Big Ten’s game of the year next week in Iowa City.